Our potentially new Defense Secretary

kenny olavkenny olav Posts: 3,319
edited November 2006 in A Moving Train
I did some quick research on Robert Gates and discovered he's a typical Bush appointee.

He served as Director of the CIA under his father's presidency, to top off a 26 year career in the CIA.

In the tradition of other Dubya appointees before him (namely Elliott Abrams, Otto Reich, John Negroponte and John Poindexter) Gates was implicated for involvement in the Iran Contra Affair, during which he was our esteemed Deputy Director of the CIA. But of course, like the rest of them, he never got convicted of anything.

Anyone else got some info on him?
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    I don't have any info, but in respect to his appointment - what did you expect? Does anyone expect this administration to place anybody with any competence in key positions?
  • dangerboydangerboy Posts: 1,569
    hence, the old saying "careful what you wish for"


    ebay isn't evil people are


    The South is Much Obliged
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    This is part of the reason that I couldn't understand the dancing in the streets over Rumsfeld quitting. The successor probably won't be much different.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • evenkatevenkat Posts: 380
    He will have to be confirmed by the Senate and that may not be so easy now.
    "...believe in lies...to get by...it's divine...whoa...oh, you know what its like..."
  • know1 wrote:
    This is part of the reason that I couldn't understand the dancing in the streets over Rumsfeld quitting. The successor probably won't be much different.


    He couldn't be any worse.
  • cutback wrote:
    I don't have any info, but in respect to his appointment - what did you expect? Does anyone expect this administration to place anybody with any competence in key positions?


    No competence? You say this now.......


    I've heard numberous people like you contend that this administration controls not only the entire world's oil supply, but the world itself.

    That's not the definition of incompetence.
    "Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"

    "What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."

    Camden 5-28-06
    Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
  • He couldn't be any worse.


    That's because he isn't on the job yet.


    Give yourself a week and you'll think of something......
    "Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"

    "What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."

    Camden 5-28-06
    Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
  • My bad, got mixed up on what I was writing and where.
  • That's because he isn't on the job yet.


    Give yourself a week and you'll think of something......


    Well, if he does something that is a bad move, I'm going to say something about it. Fuck sitting back and just watching.
  • Well, if he does something that is a bad move, I'm going to say something about it. Fuck sitting back and just watching.


    lol You're immediate response of "if he does something that is a bad move" just tells me that you have no intentions of looking for anything good this guy does.
    "Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"

    "What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."

    Camden 5-28-06
    Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
  • dangerboydangerboy Posts: 1,569
    No competence? You say this now.......


    I've heard numberous people like you contend that this administration controls not only the entire world's oil supply, but the world itself.

    That's not the definition of incompetence.

    this is the one that always vexes them: how can W simultaneously be an evil genius and an illiterate hillbilly?


    ebay isn't evil people are


    The South is Much Obliged
  • lol You're immediate response of "if he does something that is a bad move" just tells me that you have no intentions of looking for anything good this guy does.


    Really? Then you're blind. Fool.
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    No competence? You say this now.......


    I've heard numberous people like you contend that this administration controls not only the entire world's oil supply, but the world itself.

    That's not the definition of incompetence.
    No, I say this all the time. What has this administration not fucked up? And before you lump me in with some group, let it be known that even with the change we have experienced today, I do not believe anything will change and unfortunately it might get worse.
  • Did I say numberous?
    "Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"

    "What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."

    Camden 5-28-06
    Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
  • cutback wrote:
    No, I say this all the time. What has this administration not fucked up? And before you lump me in with some group, let it be known that even with the change we have experienced today, I do not believe anything will change and unfortunately it might get worse.


    I know. There are no liberals, anywhere.
    "Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"

    "What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."

    Camden 5-28-06
    Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    Did I say numberous?
    I wasn't going to correct you.:)
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    I know. There are no liberals, anywhere.
    Huh?
  • Political bickering makes my mind numb at times. May have been what I was referring to.
    "Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"

    "What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."

    Camden 5-28-06
    Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    Political bickering makes my mind numb at times. May have been what I was referring to.
    I like that. "This arguing is making me numberous."
  • He's one of Bush Snr's men, keeping supervision over the neocons (of which he isn't one). He's actually a professional, in marked contrast with Rumsfeld.

    Gates kept his hands clean during the Iran contra scandal, when many around him fell, and he is a man who understands Intelligence (not necessarily a pre-requisite for becoming CIA Director).

    Bush hasn't any choice but to go back to his father's political peers, for help and experience. The neocons are fucked.


    Edit: Forgot my main point. He's there, to engineer a withdrawal. In the meantime, Dubya will be told to shut up, and catch up with Rove in the reading competition.
  • He's one of Bush Snr's men, keeping supervision over the neocons (of which he isn't one). He's actually a professional, in marked contrast with Rumsfeld.

    Gates kept his hands clean during the Iran contra scandal, when many around him fell, and he is a man who understands Intelligence (not necessarily a pre-requisite for becoming CIA Director).

    Bush hasn't any choice but to go back to his father's political peers, for help and experience. The neocons are fucked.


    Edit: Forgot my main point. He's there, to engineer a withdrawal. In the meantime, Dubya will be told to shut up, and catch up with Rove in the reading competition.

    Yay! A Bush joke!
    "Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"

    "What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."

    Camden 5-28-06
    Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    I tend to agree with Finsbury on this one. The Senior Bush's administration understood the methods of risk assessment... something the Junior Bush just doesn't seem to get. Like, I believe had Colin Powell been appointed as Secretary of Defense, the rush into Iraq would not have gone on the timetables set by Cheney/Bush Jr. and Wolfowitz. A former C.I.A. man has the experience to look at and assess risks that he is willing to place his men in... not taking them for granted to carry out his personal will.
    ...
    And the bottom line... Rumsfeld made poor decisions and failed to take responsibility for them. That whole, "You go to war with the army you have" bullshit really pissed me off. If you are willing to send young men and women into battle, you must provide them with the best equipment to insure their safety and limit their risks... above all costs.
    I'm not willing or able to assess Gates because I have yet to see how he performs. I am hoping that he will refuse to follow Bush Jr's failed plan of Staying the Course and chart a new direction to get our guys home and leave the responsibility on the fucking Iraqis... who seem to be okay with having our guys do all the heavy lifting.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • bootlegger10bootlegger10 Posts: 15,946
    Jeez, you are already judging someone you didn't even know existed yesterday based on a google search. "Bias"
  • Cosmo wrote:
    I tend to agree with Finsbury on this one. The Senior Bush's administration understood the methods of risk assessment... something the Junior Bush just doesn't seem to get. Like, I believe had Colin Powell been appointed as Secretary of Defense, the rush into Iraq would not have gone on the timetables set by Cheney/Bush Jr. and Wolfowitz. A former C.I.A. man has the experience to look at and assess risks that he is willing to place his men in... not taking them for granted to carry out his personal will.
    ...
    And the bottom line... Rumsfeld made poor decisions and failed to take responsibility for them. That whole, "You go to war with the army you have" bullshit really pissed me off. If you are willing to send young men and women into battle, you must provide them with the best equipment to insure their safety and limit their risks... above all costs.
    I'm not willing or able to assess Gates because I have yet to see how he performs. I am hoping that he will refuse to follow Bush Jr's failed plan of Staying the Course and chart a new direction to get our guys home and leave the responsibility on the fucking Iraqis... who seem to be okay with having our guys do all the heavy lifting.

    Bush Sr. didn't finish off Saddam in '91 because the Democrats screamed bloody murder as we sat outside the gates of Baghdad.

    And here we are 15 years later and those same Democrats are complaining that we should have finished the job the first time.

    I do believe it takes a "majority" of liberals in congress to form a cognizant thought.

    Haha, a liberal joke!

    On top of this you are without a doubt a Bush hater. Nothing anyone in this administration does will be "good." You've already predetermined that. That I'm sure of.
    "Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"

    "What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."

    Camden 5-28-06
    Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
  • EbizzieEbizzie Posts: 240
    Cosmo wrote:
    I tend to agree with Finsbury on this one. The Senior Bush's administration understood the methods of risk assessment... something the Junior Bush just doesn't seem to get. Like, I believe had Colin Powell been appointed as Secretary of Defense, the rush into Iraq would not have gone on the timetables set by Cheney/Bush Jr. and Wolfowitz. A former C.I.A. man has the experience to look at and assess risks that he is willing to place his men in... not taking them for granted to carry out his personal will.
    ...
    And the bottom line... Rumsfeld made poor decisions and failed to take responsibility for them. That whole, "You go to war with the army you have" bullshit really pissed me off. If you are willing to send young men and women into battle, you must provide them with the best equipment to insure their safety and limit their risks... above all costs.
    I'm not willing or able to assess Gates because I have yet to see how he performs. I am hoping that he will refuse to follow Bush Jr's failed plan of Staying the Course and chart a new direction to get our guys home and leave the responsibility on the fucking Iraqis... who seem to be okay with having our guys do all the heavy lifting.

    Agreed...Bush Sr. was actually a pretty decent president when it came to foreign affairs. His son on the other hand.... I think GW may have finally went to his father for some advice.

    Incidentally, another interesting thing about Rummy's dismissal and Gates' appointment is the fact that Cheney apparently fought hard against both. Seems that GW is finally getting a clue that he can't lean on those he has in the past for advice.
    "Worse than traitors in arms are the men who pretend loyalty to the flag, feast and fatten on the misfortunes of the nation while patriotic blood is crimsoning the plains." -- Abraham Lincoln
  • JD SalJD Sal Posts: 790
    Bush Sr. didn't finish off Saddam in '91 because the Democrats screamed bloody murder as we sat outside the gates of Baghdad.

    And here we are 15 years later and those same Democrats are complaining that we should have finished the job the first time.

    Kind of like how the republicans claim that Clinton was too distracted with Lewinsky and neglected the terror threat when the republicans were to blame for the distraction.
    "If no one sees you, you're not here at all"
  • JD Sal wrote:
    Kind of like how the republicans claim that Clinton was too distracted with Lewinsky and neglected the terror threat when the republicans were to blame for the distraction.


    In '93 the WTC was bombed.

    Clinton did nothing.

    In '93 18 soldiers were killed in Somalia.

    Clinton responded by pulling out.

    In '95 5 Americans killed and many more wounded by a car bombing in Saudi Arabia.

    Clinton did nothing.

    In '96 a USAF base was bombed in Saudi Arabia.

    Clinton did nothing.

    in '96 Saddam whiped out the Kurdish city of Erbil.

    Clinton lobbed some bombs into the Iraqi desert.

    In '98 US embassies in Keny and Tanzania were bombed.

    Clinton did nothing.


    yada yada yada...

    The only thing Clinton was distracted from was being President of the United States. What's that line liberals are always shouting at me? "The governments job is to protect the citizens of this country!" Right...


    Oh.. And his marital vows...
    "Sarcasm: intellect on the offensive"

    "What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."

    Camden 5-28-06
    Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
  • mammasanmammasan Posts: 5,656
    Bush Sr. didn't finish off Saddam in '91 because the Democrats screamed bloody murder as we sat outside the gates of Baghdad.

    Bush Sr. didn't finish the job, as you stated, back then because he realized what that would entail. He realized that we where there to get Iraq out of Kuwait and by going beyond that would have damaged the coalition he put together. Unlike Jr. Sr. understood what would happen to Iraq when Saddam fell and knew that it would take hundreds of thousands of troops and years to brink that country to any sense of normalcy. He knew that we wouldn't be greeted with flowers and candy.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • JD SalJD Sal Posts: 790
    In '93 the WTC was bombed.

    Clinton did nothing.

    In '93 18 soldiers were killed in Somalia.

    Clinton responded by pulling out.

    In '95 5 Americans killed and many more wounded by a car bombing in Saudi Arabia.

    Clinton did nothing.

    In '96 a USAF base was bombed in Saudi Arabia.

    Clinton did nothing.

    in '96 Saddam whiped out the Kurdish city of Erbil.

    Clinton lobbed some bombs into the Iraqi desert.

    In '98 US embassies in Keny and Tanzania were bombed.

    Clinton did nothing.


    yada yada yada...

    The only thing Clinton was distracted from was being President of the United States. What's that line liberals are always shouting at me? "The governments job is to protect the citizens of this country!" Right...


    Oh.. And his marital vows...

    How many tens or hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians have died since the invasion?

    I'd like to protect the citizens of ANY country personally.
    "If no one sees you, you're not here at all"
  • mammasanmammasan Posts: 5,656
    In '93 the WTC was bombed.

    Clinton did nothing.

    In '93 18 soldiers were killed in Somalia.

    Clinton responded by pulling out.

    In '95 5 Americans killed and many more wounded by a car bombing in Saudi Arabia.

    Clinton did nothing.

    In '96 a USAF base was bombed in Saudi Arabia.

    Clinton did nothing.

    in '96 Saddam whiped out the Kurdish city of Erbil.

    Clinton lobbed some bombs into the Iraqi desert.

    In '98 US embassies in Keny and Tanzania were bombed.

    Clinton did nothing.


    I'm nottrying to get into apissing match of who was betterClinton or Bush, becausein my opinion they both sucked, but how do you know Clinton did nothing. How do you know that Clinton didn't have the CIA working on this or other covert operations or is militray action the only way you see fit. The purpotrators of the 93 WTC bombing where apprehanded, tried, and convicted of their crime. That tome is doing something. Somalia I believe he did the right thing by pulling the troops out. They where involved in a situation they should have never been involved in. I can't say wether Clinton did or didn't do anything about the other attacks you mentioned because as I statedthere may have been operations underway that the public had no knowledge of.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
Sign In or Register to comment.